forex-scalping.com

Thanks for the numbers. I'd separate the two claims, though. 233 or 377 as a size range is reasonable for cable at the London open; the Fibonacci part I don't buy. Nothing in the order flow knows whether the bar closed on tick 233 or 250.

How I set mine: pick a count that gives roughly one bar every 30–60 seconds through the first hour of London, then check it still draws sensible bars at 10:30 when things slow down. On my feed that lands around 300 for GBPUSD. Another broker's stream could put it at 200 or 500, since tick counts depend on how often the feed updates, and that varies a lot between providers.

And yes, the time chart stays on the second screen. Session opens and data releases are clock events, and tick bars smear them.

The cost arithmetic is the strongest part of this. One pip on a 6-pip target is about 17% of the gross, and moving up to 15 pips cuts that below 7%. I'd add that the stop scales too. If the 15-pip winner comes with a 10-pip stop instead of a 4-pip one, lot size drops to keep risk fixed, and cost per trade in R falls from 0.25R to 0.1R. That's where most of the benefit really comes from.

The win-rate claim I'm less sure of. "Barely clears a coin flip" depends entirely on the payoff; plenty of M1 setups run at 40% with 2:1 and do fine after costs. The journal question is expectancy per trade net of spread, not win rate.

My own shift from an M1 trigger to M5 was mostly about your last point. Watching every bar was costing me decisions, not pips.